Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mnehrling

I read this whole article but not all of the comments that were made about it so please excuse me if I repeat something that someone else said.

The New Republic is a legitimate opinion magazine, albeit a liberal one, and this article is quite credible. Ron Paul cannot claim to be ignorant about the content of newsletters that he published over a period of many years. Even if he did not agree with everything that was written in these newsletters, he is certainly responsible for disseminating the views of those who did. After all, he wasn’t obligated to publish anything that he did not approve of or agree with.

Ron Paul is a kook, a conspiracy theorist and a bigot. He may have sound opinions on a few issues but that doesn’t mean that he is fit to be President because he isn’t.


372 posted on 01/09/2008 6:58:11 AM PST by steadfastconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: steadfastconservative

Update in post #337- looks like the national review had scanned copies, some with paul’s signature on them. The full newsletter can be read, not just pull quotes (that doesn’t make it any better for paul.)


373 posted on 01/09/2008 6:59:51 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 372 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson